Understanding the Proposed Amendments to the Waqf Act: A Step Towards Transparency or a Threat to Rights?

In recent times, the Central Government introduced a bill in Parliament to amend the Waqf Act of 1995. The goal? To bring more transparency and accountability to the functioning of Waqf boards. As anticipated, the bill has met with considerable opposition and has now been referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee for further review. Public comments have also been invited, but unfortunately, misinformation is rife, especially on social media platforms. To clear up the confusion, here’s a breakdown of the key points in the proposed amendments and their broader context.

What is Waqf?

Waqf refers to immovable or movable property that is permanently donated for charitable purposes in the name of Allah and Islam. Whether created by written or oral agreement, once a property becomes Waqf, it cannot be taken back. Properties such as mosques, schools, burial grounds, and shelters fall under this category, and once donated, the property permanently belongs to the Waqf board, which is responsible for managing it.

The first law governing Waqf was introduced by the British in 1923, but due to the growing misuse and illegal sale of Waqf properties, the Waqf board was established to safeguard these assets. Today, the Waqf board controls vast tracts of land across India.

Why Amend the Waqf Act?

The Waqf Act of 1995, passed during Prime Minister Narasimha Rao's tenure, provided the Waqf board with considerable power, including the authority to determine if a property was Waqf, even if it was registered under another law. This was seen as giving the Waqf board unchecked control over properties, leading to concerns about transparency.

The Central Government's new bill, introduced on August 8, 2024, aims to limit the Waqf board's powers while introducing key amendments to address concerns raised by various stakeholders.

Key Proposed Amendments:

1. Revised Definition of Waqf: Only self-owned property can be declared as Waqf. This change removes the provision allowing properties to be considered Waqf based on historical usage.
2. Inheritance Rights: Family Waqfs will no longer affect the inheritance rights of other heirs, particularly women. This move aims to safeguard the rights of women under Islamic inheritance laws.
3. Central Waqf Board: A Central Waqf Board will be established, chaired by the Union Minister for the relevant department. It will also include MPs, lawyers, and two Muslim women members, ensuring better representation across different sects and communities.
4. Waqf Tribunal: Waqf Tribunal decisions can now be appealed in the High Court, increasing judicial oversight. These tribunals will be headed by district judges, adding a level of judicial scrutiny to the process.
5. Government Properties: If a property is declared Waqf but belongs to the government, it will automatically revert to government ownership. This measure is designed to prevent misuse or illegal declarations of public land as Waqf.
6. Property Audits: Waqf boards will now be required to verify and audit their properties. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) will also audit the accounts, promoting financial accountability.
7. Separate Waqf Boards for Certain Communities: Bohra and Aga Khan communities may receive separate Waqf boards, even if they do not meet the existing 15% property or income requirement. This is seen as a move towards inclusivity for these communities.

Why the Opposition?

Opponents of the bill, including many political parties and Muslim organizations, argue that it undermines the rights of the Muslim community, particularly by giving the government the power to reclaim Waqf properties. Additionally, they claim that the amendments interfere with religious matters and erode the autonomy of the Waqf board.

The Broader Context

At its core, the proposed amendments focus on curbing the Waqf board’s powers to declare any property as Waqf. In contrast, the opposition is concerned about government overreach. The idea of limiting Waqf boards' control isn't entirely new. Similar provisions exist in laws like the Companies Act, Public Trusts Act, and Income Tax Act.

Conclusion: A Battle for Transparency or Control?

The government's intent seems clear: ensure that Waqf boards are more transparent and accountable, while preventing any misuse of their extensive powers. However, the opposition views the amendments as a threat to Muslim rights and a governmental attempt to seize control of Waqf properties.

Whatever the outcome, it is likely that if this law passes, it will face legal challenges in the Supreme Court. The battle over Waqf properties is far from over, and only time will tell how these proposed changes will shape the future of Waqf administration in India.